Is US headed for a planned collapse?


Richard Moore

This article comes from LaRouche's website. Some people object to LaRouche 
because they consider him to be anti-semitic. Personally, I don't care about the
nature of any messenger, I'm interested in the message -- learning what I can 
about what's going on in the world. This particular article, for example, makes 
a lot of sense and seems to be well researched.

Also I am puzzled by the criteria people use to dismiss sources. The same people
who want to ignore certain sources because those sources are not 'always 
reliable' seem to have no problem reading the New York Times, which is full of 
propaganda, kow tows to the party line, supported the invasion of Iraq, refuses 
to publish anything that questions the 911 lies, etc. etc.


Original source URL:

This article appears in the December 8, 2006 issue of Executive Intelligence 

British Push Puppet Cheney
To Trigger Global Chaos
by Jeffrey Steinberg

Within hours of Air Force II returning to Washington from Saudi Arabia, 
Executive Intelligence Review issued a memorandum, "Behind Cheney's Trip to 
Riyadh." The document revealed that the Bush Administration has launched a new 
berserker "diplomatic" initiative, which, if successful, would likely trigger a 
new Hundred Years' War, starting in Southwest Asia, but soon engulfing much of 
the planet in chaos.

The Cheney scheme to promote a so-called "Sunni alliance" to counter Iran's 
growing Shi'ite dominance over the Persian Gulf and Eastern Mediterranean 
region, is the latest handiwork of a crew of outright British agents, who have 
employed the thuggish Vice President and his deadly wife, to wreck the United 
States from within, as a step towards undoing the entire nation-state system.

On the surface, the argument could credibly be made that the immediate target of
the Cheney trip to Riyadh‹the latest victim of a Cheney preemptive strike‹was 
his long-time political rival cum arch-enemy, James Baker III. Cheney's push for
a Sunni military alliance with Washington and Tel Aviv against Iran was, after 
all, kicked off literally moments before the Baker-Hamilton Iraq Study Group 
held its final meetings, before presenting its findings to the White House and 
the outgoing Congress on Dec. 6. Those findings were widely reported to include 
the call for a regional peace conference and the beginning of direct diplomatic 
talks among the United States, Iran, and Syria.

But the reality is different. By the time the Baker-Hamilton study group was 
seated around the conference table at the U.S. Institute for Peace in 
Washington, the "Ultimate Decider," President Bush, had already "decided." He 
shot off his mouth at the NATO summit in Riga, Latvia, declaring that the United
States will not consider withdrawal from Iraq until "victory" has been achieved,
and will not talk with Iran or Syria.

Moreover, State Department official Nicholas Burns had told reporters travelling
with the President that the goal of the NATO summit in Riga, apart from the push
for increased NATO troop deployments in Afghanistan, would be to forge closer 
security ties between NATO and the leading American allies in the Pacific Far 
East, and in the Persian Gulf and Eastern Mediterranean. In the case of the 
Persian Gulf, Burns singled out the Gulf Cooperation Council, the alliance of 
Sunni oil sheikhdoms, as the best vehicle for NATO extension. Qatar and Kuwait, 
two GCC members, have already been engaged in quiet talks with NATO, on 
increasing defense cooperation, according to one well-placed Arab source.

And on Nov. 29, Nawaf Obaid, an advisor to the Saudi government, penned a 
Washington Post op-ed, threatening that Saudi Arabia would intervene to arm the 
Sunni population in Iraq, were the United States to withdraw its troops. "To be 
sure," Obeid warned, "Saudi engagement in Iraq carries great risks‹it could 
spark a regional war. So be it: The consequences of inaction are far worse."

Fomenting Chaos

In point of fact, there never was a Bush Administration "policy review" on the 
Middle East. Senior Washington sources have reported that the United States is 
doing exactly what Jordan's King Abdallah II warned against on Nov. 26, in an 
appearance on CBS-TV: fomenting three civil wars in the region‹in Lebanon, in 
the Palestinian territories, and in Iraq.

  * In Lebanon, the U.S., in conjunction with Saudi Arabia,
   is covertly arming the Sunni Muslims, in preparation
   for a showdown with Hezbollah, the Shi'ite political
   movement whose militia defeated Israel's military
   invasion in the July 2006 Lebanese War.

   According to one eyewitness account, truckloads of arms
   are being distributed in Beirut after midnight every
   night. What's more, al-Qaeda elements, operating in
   northern Lebanon, are reportedly conduiting arms to the
   Lebanese Sunni‹with the see-no-evil approval of
   Washington and Riyadh. Current events inside Lebanon
   are reminiscent of Henry Kissinger's mid-1970s
   orchestration of the first Lebanese Civil War, which
   began with a string of targetted assassinations, and
   was stoked by a massive clandestine infusion of weapons
   to all sides.

  * In the Palestinian territories, the United States, in
   league with Jordan, is covertly arming and training
   Fatah militia factions, with the aim of orchestrating a
   showdown with Hamas. Furthermore, every effort at
   establishing a Palestinian national unity government,
   with Hamas and Fatah, has been shot down by the Bush
   Administration, giving Israel the green light to
   continue to withhold tax payments to the Palestinian
   Authority, thus creating a cauldron of poverty and
   rage. On Dec. 1, Palestinian Authority President
   Mahmoud Abbas announced that the unity talks had
   totally broken down, and that he could call early

  * In Iraq, the Bush Administration is fueling the
   downward spiral into full-scale civil war and ethnic
   cleansing‹including an effort to induce Shia versus
   Shia fighting. Just hours before the scheduled meeting
   of President Bush with Iraq's Prime Minister Nouri
   al-Maliki in Amman, Jordan, on Nov. 29, the White House
   disclosed a classified memorandum by National Security
   Advisor Stephen Hadley, questioning the Iraqi Prime
   Minister's ability to deliver. The memo‹which was
   "leaked" to the New York Times by a "senior
   administration official" who also briefed the author of
   the Times story, Michael Gordon‹stated, in part: "His
   intentions seem good when he talks with Americans, and
   sensitive reporting suggests he is trying to stand up
   to the Shia hierarchy and force positive change. But
   the reality on the streets of Baghdad suggests Maliki
   is either ignorant of what is going on, misrepresenting
   his intentions, or that his capabilities are not yet
   sufficient to turn his good intentions into action."

The White House leak guaranteed that the Bush-Maliki meeting would be a fiasco. 
Reportedly, the President pressed the Iraqi Prime Minister to crack down on 
Shi'ite leader Muktadr al-Sadr and his Mahdi Army, a preposterous demand, given 
that Sadr had delivered the decisive votes to get Maliki the Prime Ministership 
in the first place, and his militia is larger, more disciplined, and better 
armed than the official Iraqi Army. To further fuel Shia versus Shia communal 
violence, President Bush announced on Dec. 2 that he would be hosting Sayyed 
Abdul Aziz al-Hakim, the president of the Supreme Council for the Islamic 
Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI), at the White House. There, he will reportedly press 
Hakim to turn his Badr Brigade against the Mahdi Army. Sheer madness!

Bernard Lewis's 'Wet Dream'

While the hands and feet of this "three civil war" fiasco may be American, the 
authorship of the Armageddon drive is distinctly British. It is no secret that 
Vice President Cheney operates under the influence of three notorious British 
agents: Dr. Bernard Lewis, Dr. Henry Kissinger, and George Shultz. For Lewis, 
the British Arab Bureau Zionist spook who originated the "Clash of Civilization"
lunacy in 1990, a Sunni versus Shi'ite conflict in the Persian Gulf and Eastern 
Mediterranean region, would be the ultimate British imperial "wet dream." Lewis 
has been Cheney's key "advisor" on Arab and Islamic affairs, frequently 
participating in private dinner seminars at the Vice Presidential Residence at 
the Naval Observatory.

Washington Post author Bob Woodward wrote in his latest book, Denial, that 
Cheney admitted to him that Henry Kissinger, the author of the Malthusian 
National Security Study Memorandum 200 (NSSM-200), has been his most frequent 
outside advisor on national security and foreign policy affairs‹particularly 
Iraq. In May 1982, Kissinger boasted, at a public event at Chatham House, the 
London headquarters of the Royal Institute for International Affairs (RIIA), 
that he took his cue, as Nixon and Ford's National Security Advisor and 
Secretary of State, "from the British Foreign Office," often working directly 
off Foreign Office draft documents. In the same speech, Kissinger waxed eloquent
on the imperial virtues of Winston Churchill, while denouncing the "moralizing" 
of Franklin Roosevelt.

And while ground zero for the planned chaos is the Persian Gulf and Eastern 
Mediterranean, the primary target is not the oil patch: It is the United States.
The Anglo-Dutch Liberal imperialist faction, the Venetian-modelled structure 
behind the antics of Lewis, Kissinger, and Shultz, is dedicated to a world 
empire, built on the rotting corpse of the nation-state system. To achieve that 
goal, the United States, itself, must be destroyed‹internally through economic 
and social disintegration, and globally, through a string of horrific policy 
fiascos. That is what is behind the latest insanity from Bush and Cheney. They 
are the dupes in a high-stakes British game to destroy the United States once 
and for all.

For these oligarchs, the prospect of a United States surviving the Bush-Cheney 
Presidency, with its constitutional institutions intact, is unacceptable. They 
fear a revival of the American System, and understand that the resounding 
electoral defeat of Bush and Cheney on Nov. 7, was a mandate for impeachment, 
and a demand for fundamental changes in economic and national security policy.

Furthermore, they know that their vision of a one-world empire, led by an 
Anglo-Dutch-centered financier oligarchy, is unattainable, without a massive 
reduction in world population. They therefore welcome a new Hundred Years' War. 
They relish the prospect of global chaos, asymmetric warfare, and waves of 
disease and famine.

They do not seek an American giant, flexing its muscle while tugging on a 
British leash. They want the United States Constitutional ship to sink in the 
depths of the ocean. Why else would anyone have engineered George W. Bush and 
Dick Cheney into the White House?

Escaping the Matrix website
cyberjournal website  
subscribe cyberjournal list     mailto:•••@••.•••
Posting archives      
  cyberjournal forum  
  Achieving real democracy
  for readers of ETM  
  Community Empowerment
  Blogger made easy